the opportunity to diverse, talk about afghanistan, bahrain, syria, talk about this, that, and so the agenda has to be narrow as a need of focusing on the issue of the principle concern. that's one. that's con accept issue, as far as i can tell was never resolved. when an issue remains unresolved, the status quo revails. i suspect, given the fact the issue of a bilateral conversation is a last ditch effort, likely to remain focused. should it be considered a last ditch effort? i don't think so. you talk about years of decision, the year of that, the year of that. we have more time on this issue. it's a paradoxical one. think about it as not having the time, yet, there's always more time. you know, everybody, so this is in 2008, 2009, somehow this issue seems to have within its urgency a degree of time flexibility. i don't know how to explain that. we have had bilateral discussions before in october 2009, most collectly. if there's a bilateral one to take place, which tends to condition the agenda that's going to be discussed. >> marina, bringing you in on this, ray said we need a sense of modest
